Originally Posted by
Baa_Baa
Ok, forget the ethics then, what is it that enables a 'retirement company' to obtain a binding ruling, that exempts them from paying tax?
I wonder how many shareholders actually knew this. Maybe some/most did know, I'm just asking, as it seems a false pedestal for commercial achievement and one that can be whipped away at the behest of the IRD.
Not to mention MSD potentially changing the rules on care subsidies like they have in Australia. Seems this sector is riding the back of the taxpayer, for the advantage of shareholders, but that's just a personal perception.
Having some experience working with the IRD, it's situations like this that hit the public spotlight where the Commissioner gets a 'please explain' and suddenly there is a reversal of sentiment. The big rule in government agencies is never do anything that makes it to the front page of the newspaper and embarrasses the Commissioner, or CEO.
So now we have a headline. What next?